Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2014 10:47:02 -0500
Reply-To: Jim Felder <jim.felder@GMAIL.COM>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: Jim Felder <jim.felder@GMAIL.COM>
Subject: Re: difference's between model years
In-Reply-To: <5426CB1D.9040008@cox.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
I have had a 90 from new, a used 91, and my diesel 83 5-speed, now
turbo-ed. SoI've experienced early and late features and the lack thereof.
The 83 is the one I kept, and the one i drive daily. I don't have the
others, they were not worth the eventual trouble. I have 362,000 on the
diesel.
But that has a lot to do with the simplicity of the older car and the fact
that I do all my own work. I want something I can manage. I am happy not to
have electric mirrors and electric windows and an ECU and all that. Been
there and fixed that, lots of times. I love the car as it is. If you value
the amenities that the later models have, then you will like a later model
better. I really can't complain about the way the slider door works on the
83, or the lack of sound deadener (which I have added). If you don't like
dinking around with something all the time, the earlier models might suit
you for their simplicity. I am speaking of diesels here, I have never head
a 1.9 water boxer but have rebuilt my 2.1s and replaced heads and gaskets.
I was thinking today that if you want to be in a bad mood for three weeks,
rebuild a waterboxer.. It seems counterintuitive that an older car would be
more reliable, but if you are willing to go to the work and expense of
making it good in the first place, the older ones can stay that way longer.
I can see that a complete understanding of the fuel injection and ignition
and engine control systems would probably shift my point of view a lot, but
what I am is a good mechanic and a not-so-good electronic diagnoser. I am
just doing the best I can with what I have.
With all models there are problems of course. I spent last evening and this
morning replacing steering rack boots that were put on one year ago. It's
really a shame that so many of the poor parts nowadays cause so much
additional work.
Bottom line, the later model vanagons in good shape are the best ever
built, I think. But your circumstances may make you lean toward something
that is still every bit a vanagon, but simpler.
Jim
On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 9:35 AM, mark drillock <mdrillock@cox.net> wrote:
> Many of the much improved later vans came without "all the bells and
> whistles" so no need to get added features you don't care for. The
> earlier vans are fine but 87 and later gets you so many improvements
> over most 84 and earlier vans that it is not a fair comparison.
>
> Mark
>
>
> Don Hanson wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 1:39 AM, SDF ( aka ;jim lahey' - Scott ) <
>> scottdaniel@turbovans.com> wrote:
>> The short version and bottom line is,
>> 87 is the first year with 'all the important changes finally done.'
>>
>> t
>>
>> Somewhat off the original posters question, and a personal opinion
>> only________
>>
>> If there was a basic 84 in perfect shape and a 91 in perfect shape with
>> all the bells and whistles, side by side, there for my choice...and I
>> didn't have to think about reselling eventually and both had identical
>> aftermarket conversion engines...there would be no hesitation on my part,
>> I'd take the 84 in a heartbeat.
>>
>>
>>
| 
